Next Stop: The 2013 Burnham Prize Competition

The NEXT STOP competition challenged designers worldwide to propose a vision for iconic, functional and sustainable stations for Chicago’s planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. It attracted forty-two entries representing design teams from 14 countries. Each competition entry includeed a station prototype and variations for three neighborhoods—the Loop, Bucktown-Logan Square and Pilsen.

The competition jury included:

• Monica Chadha (Converge:Exchange)

• Gordon Gill (Adrian Smith+Gordon Gill Architecture)

• Cheri Heramb (AECOM)

• Gabe Klein, (Chicago Department of Transportation)

• Pat Natke (UrbanWorks Architecture)

• Peter Osler (Illinois Institute of Technology)

• Carol Ross Barney (Ross Barney Architects)

• Rebekah Scheinfeld (Chicago Transit Authority)

• Charles Smith (Cannon Design)

• Stanley Tigerman (Tigerman McCurry Architecture).

Commenting on the importance of ideas competitions to urban design, Chicago Architectural Club co-President Brian Strawn stated, “These visionary designs have come from the ground up, directly from the design and architecture community itself.” Added co-President Karla Sierralta, “This competition process should be used as a model to create a better designed Chicago, by sourcing the best ideas from around the globe and directly from our local community.”

According to Chicago Architecture Foundation CEO Lynn Osmond, the design ideas submitted represent an innovative vision for the transit station of the future. “Visionary and functional, these designs much more than bus stops,” Osmond said. “We believe the ideas presented here can and should inform the future of BRT In Chicago.”

“The more we looked at the design schemes,” noted Chicago Department of Transportation Commissioner and juror, Gabe Klein, “the more I was reminded that we aren’t just creting a transportation system—we’re creating place with these stations. And we’re reinventing the street.”

“A Bus Rapid Transit station isn’t just a way to access transit,” said Chris Ziemann, Chicago BRT Project Manager. “It’s the rider’s first experience with this new mode. The form and shape of the station will ultimately influence public acceptance of BRT in the City.”

First Place

Form vs. Uniform: Generative Chicago BRT Stations

Hesam T. Rostami and Bahareh Atash, Toronto

Click images to enlarge

Form vs. Uniform Incorporates a simple wood surface, which allows BRT stations to be consistent yet unique to their surroundings. Wood strips form the station structure, roof, and entrances. The width and pattern of the wooden strips vary in order to block summer sun. Glass walls provide shelter and views. Rooftop windows let in fresh air. Solar panels generate a portion of the power needed to operate station features including ticket machines, sliding doors, and real time arrival screens. Station amenities include heat lamps and bike racks.

Judges commented:“The first place winners developed a beautiful station design that combines classic materials with state–of-the art technology to create a new iconic look for a BRT system in Chicago. The design has a timeless quality and simple elegance. It has good integration of structure, seating and enclosure, is easily adapted for varying entry needs and could shelter bikes, as well as people.”

Second Place

Enthalpy

Goi Artetxe and Elise Katherine Renwick, Chicago

Click images to enlarge

Enthalpy stations serve the community as well as BRT riders. (Enthalpy means the measure of total energy of a thermodynamic system.) The stations incorporate solar panels to generate energy, which powers the stations or returns to the grid. The structures include bike storage, recycling points, ticketing machines, and seating. Vending machines offer bike accessories and snacks. The stations are clad in metal mesh. Judges commented: “The design for the second place winner creates an inviting space with a feeling of openness that does not overwhelm the street context, and successfully integrates solar and digital technologies.”

Third Place

BTA

Conor O’Shea and Aneesha Dharwadker, Boston

Click images to enlarge

Bus Transit Authority, BTA, is a framework that can adapt to the city and neighborhood scale. Modular units can be arranged as local conditions demand. The flexibility and low cost of BTA components allow for stations to changed based on fluctuating economic conditions, neighborhood development, and seasonal ridership. Stations can be assembled and disassembled for one-off occasions such as sporting events or political rallies.

Judges remarked: “The third place winners have proposed a station design with a modern look that works across the city, downtown or in the neighborhoods, day and night, and can be sized to fit the right scale needed for each stop with fully integrated digital technology for customer information.”

by James Reston, Jr.Arcade Publishing
New York (2017)
Hardcover, 267 pages
ISBN 9781628728569

View from the memorial to the Washington Monument
Photo: Paul Spreiregen

Having an idea is one thing. Realization of that idea is another. Maybe this should have been the main thrust of a new book on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC. Instead, the author of this book, whose interest in this topic dates back to his military service during the Vietnam conflict, chose to sensationalize the the cultural and political themes familiar to the project, rather than treat its progress in contrast to the evolution of other recent memorial competitions located on or near the Mall, the political and emotional components of the various memorials notwithstanding. The World War II Memorial and Eisenhower Memorial also were fraught with controversy by the public and in the press, whereby one hardly resembled the original design, and the other has not yet made it beyond the drawing board. Projects on or near the Mall run into similar obstacles in navigating their way through the DC approval process unscathed, regardless of the subject matter.\

After surmounting two formidable obstacles, an open international competition with over 260 entries and a second stage limited to four other finalists—two of which were high-profile invitees*—the young Copenhagen firm of Vargo, Nielsen & Palle was declared the winner of the Aarhus School of Architecture Competition. As is often the case when a competitor from a small firm advances to a final stage, the winner teamed up with ADEPT, which had placed in the top six as an honorable mention in the open stage and Rolvung & Brøndsted Arkitekter, Tri-consult and Steensen Varming.

“We must look beyond current options and activate new and original ideas,” declared Mayor Martin J. Walsh in announcing Boston’s first-ever housing competition. “The Housing Innovation Competition, “ Walsh continued, “ is a chance for Boston to take its place in the forefront of housing innovation.” Announced in 2016, less than a year after the creation of the Mayor’s Housing Innovation Lab, the competition was to address the steep costs of living in The Hub, the lack of affordable housing, and the resultant strains on residents and new arrivals. iLab joined the Department of Neighborhood Development, the Garrison Trotter Neighborhood Association, and the Boston Society of Architects in soliciting affordable housing schemes for three city-owned lots in the Roxbury section of town.

Parks have become more than leisure destinations. Cities, as clients, have insisted that parks should include more than tennis courts and swimming pools; but they should also stimulate the brain beyond what nature might have in store. Thus, the winners of the 2012 Taichung Gateway Park competition, Catherine Mossbach and Philippe Rahm proposed an ambitious and innovative series of microclimates as the guiding thought behind their Atmospheres of Wellbeing proposal. The microclimates, scattered throughout the linear site, were to be the product of natural and artificial devices.

Until the early 1970s, architecture in Bavaria, and in Munich in particular, was not only viewed as traditional, but even leaving the impression to some as being ‘quaint.’ Then came the 1972 Olympic Games, which marked a watershed moment in design for that community. Not only was a contemporary solution for the site of the games implemented—the roof tensile structures designed by the German architect, Frei Otto was revolutionary—but a new cylindrical BMW Headquarters building arose nearby. Designed by the Austrian architect, Karl Schwarzer, as the result of an invited competition, the building became one of the city’s major landmarks—a prominent tower as arrival feature in a low-rise city.

IMPORTANT NOTICE : Unless otherwise indicated, photographs of buildings and
projects are from professional or institutional archives. All reproduction is prohibited
unless authorized by the architects, designers, office managers, consortia or archives
centers concerned. The Competition Project, Inc. is not held responsible for any
omissions or inaccuracies, but appreciate all comments and pertinent information that
will permit necessary modifications during future updates.